Is it political or is it religious?

Our Shawnee County Assessor recently decided that a truck utilized by the Fred Phelps' family in the transportation of signs to their protests was not eligible for tax exemption as it was not used primarily for religious purposes. This ruling was based on the finding that the protest signs used were political speech rather than religious speech.

Though I find the Phelps' behavior reprehensible, and I disagree with their methods of protests, I am wondering where, on a topic such as religion vs. homosexuality, do you draw the line between what is religious speech and what is political speech?

Personally, I loathe the message of hate this group spews; I loathe the places they decide to protest; I loathe the message; but mostly I loathe the perversion of Christianity they have wrought.

However, if our government can arbitrarily decide whether a message is religious or political, doesn't this cross the line of violating this group's rights as provided under the first amendment? Would this mean that any church that preaches against homosexuality, abortion, same sex marriage, euthanasia, etc... is actually a political organization? Where do we draw the line?

Though I believe that the Phelps' family will receive their appropriate "rewards" at God's Judgment, I have to also believe that this is the exact type of speech that our founding fathers were attempting to protect.

Limiting the location and time of their protests to protect the rights of other people SHOULD be done to shelter innocent family of recently deceased from the Phelps' hatred, but allowing the government to control their message, though we find it utterly despicable, should not be permitted.

If the government continues down this road, how long will it be before they are limiting other forms of religion by calling it political?